On 9/21/11 7:02 PM, Kurt Zeilenga wrote: > > On Sep 21, 2011, at 4:51 PM, Matthew Wild wrote: > >> On 22 September 2011 00:46, Kurt Zeilenga <kurt.zeile...@isode.com> >> wrote: >>> >>> On Sep 21, 2011, at 4:43 PM, Peter Saint-Andre wrote: >>> >> >>>> However I would consider it reasonable in a members-only room >>>> for removal from the Owners List or the Admins List to result >>>> in adding that person to the Members List. >>> >>> The client could offer you that option, possibly as its default. >>> >>> But let's talk wire semantics. >> >> Wire semantics are simple. A members-only room cannot contain >> someone with an affiliation of 'none'. Therefore if you set >> someone's affiliation to 'none' they must be removed from the room, >> regardless of what affiliation they had prior to the 'none' >> affiliation. >> >> Peter is correct too, in that it doesn't make much sense to kick >> an admin from the room just because they lost their admin rights. >> But in this case it's up to the client to do the right thing (make >> them a member) instead. > > So we're agreeing on what we expect from the server… > > So, back to my concern, I don't think XEP 45 section 10.7 is all that > clear in that it doesn't distinguish a move to member affiliation > from a move to none, which leads to different actions for member-only > rooms. A reader could easily take the example as applies in all > cases. And I have a particular reader whose done just that, it > seems. Which is why I suggest it might be appropriate to add some > clarification to section 10.7.
Yes, clarification would be good. I'll work that into the current round of revisions. Peter -- Peter Saint-Andre https://stpeter.im/
